What can we take away from this series ?

[rkt.india]

Project Raina is going to be Project failure in Australia. The fact is India has enough big hitters in the ranks. Get in Pujara at 4 for stability. If Yuvi fails then i think you need to give somebody who can also bowl a bit a go. Cant simply be replaced by a batsman. OR Rohit Sharma needs to start bowling on a regular basis.

This is imminent for Australia. Cannot see Raina Yuvraj doing much their whoever bats in top 4. Raina can only be good for 6.

[Old guy]

it will be gambhir vs pujara for australia :D

[Scarves]

exagerration.at best a good player.. same hyperbole. they do not have it in them to be great.they are good players.which is still a signifcant standard. if anyone looking good is great to you, then keep waiting for their nonexistent greatness. it will be a long unending wait :haha: great bowlers have made the ball talk in india as well. the basic point is class specialist bowlers will be more penetrative and tougher to compete against in many conditions. australian attack used to be very penetrative with specialist bowlers . these allrounders are less penetrative and more easier to hit in general in most conditions. a figment of your imagination.

Siddle averages less than 30 in test cricket. He is a threat remember the ball he got Tendulkar with and also Joe Root in the recent Ashes. McKay averages less than 25 in ODI cricket. If you average less than 30 in tests and 30 in ODIs you are a great bowler. Clint McKay has a better ODI average than Pollock, Ntini, Mitchell Johnson, Shane Warne, Darren Gough, Malinga, Botham, Kapil Dev. Siddle has a better average than Brett Lee, James Anderson, Kallis, Qadir, Broad and Morkel. So yeah.

[Scarves]

Decent at international level nowhere near great - can hold the bat. Clarke is alright doesn't have soft hands and dances down without having a clue at times - has bloated jadejas figures - hardly the signs of the holiness. On a spinning track not getting anywhere close vs. indian spin and dhoni in odi cricket.

Of Course Indians will be the best players of spin and of course no one will be close. In ODIs spinners are kind of different to tests. In tests we never really had a great player of spin if I can recall. Everyone was decent but nothing like a Azharuddin, Tendulkar or a Laxman.

[Lord]

1.Except Bhuvi,bowlers sucked to core. 2.Raina and UV failed whole series, need to find replacement.

bhuvi ? :hmmm: shami easily out bowled him

Jaddu was also decent for spinners imo,except at Jaipur

[Old guy]

Jaddu was also decent for spinners imo' date='except at Jaipur[/quote'] and ashwin rocked in last game

[Lord]

and ashwin rocked in last game

yup,finally stopped his useless experiments and was back to his best

[express bowling]

Apart from Johnson, no other Aussie bowler has left any mark in this series. Although the conditions were not good for bowling, great players need to do well in adverse situations as well. It proves that the Aussie bowlers we have seen in this series are only selectively good apart from Johnson. The number of length balls, long hops and wide deliveries they bowled in the face of onslaught does not speak highly of them. We are criticizing VK and Ishant for doing this. How can the Aussie be complacent !

[youngindia]

Siddle averages less than 30 in test cricket.

stats can only be only a reference.data and information are different. wait for the careers to pan out. there was once a time when gilchrist averaged 60. he ended up under 50. I mostly consider overall career averages. for the reason that all kinds of corrections are taken care of-matches played when too young,peak time,when too old,periods of good form vs bad form. example-ponting 4 years of golden form followed by some years of ordinary form at the end.these kind of corrections are important. I am not at all confident McKay can maintain his 25 sub average. by your definition, the likes of irfan and agarkar would be greats :--D .even Harvey is very close 29. Test averages are more reliable.again context is important. I would accept most under 28 as great except a few cases like Gillespie and akthar with averages 28-30, there are question marks over many of them.its a case by case basis.i would accept they must be atleast very good.but not necessarily great. McDermott is a borderline case. there are some who cosndier him great amd some only very good. he was more destructive than siddle. merv hughes I would not accept as a great and he has 28+. and I often never really needed stats. I was willing to accept warne as great from 1994 onwards and McGrath as great from 1997 onwards. my experience with siddle does not tally with experiences of past greats and I would be shocked if he does become one.

dle has a better average than Brett Lee, James Anderson, Kallis, Qadir, Broad and Morkel.

only Anderson has some credentials as he was sort of a late bloomer.his case is arguable.others not even close.

[vvvslaxman]

some kumars are predictable, Some sharmas are predictable.

[randomGuy]

This is imminent for Australia. Cannot see Raina Yuvraj doing much their whoever bats in top 4. Raina can only be good for 6.

Kartik Rayudu Sanju Samson Pujara Nayar Murali vijay Baba aparajit Gambhir Manjeet singh Maneria Rahane Uthappa Stuart binny Sehwag This should be the order of choice in selection.

[coffee_rules]

Take the bowlers away for a resort vacation for replacing bowling machines from net practice.

[Cricashfaq]

Really? Then how do you explain BK going for 3 runs in an over when Faulkner was going great guns? Pace or no pace, skills and a brain matter

Pace doesnt matter! It's all about how effective you can be with the pace you are bowling. Johnson can bowl effectively with a pace of 140-145kph+ Bhuveneswar Kumar can bowl as effective as Johnson with pace of 125-130kph+ Both of these players can destroy the top-order

[cowboysfan]

lol @ people bigging up Johnson,he is a bum who can bowl fast.the aussies will regret playing him in the ashes.

[rkt.india]

lol @ people bigging up Johnson' date='he is a bum who can bowl fast.the aussies will regret playing him in the ashes.[/quote'] Like they regretted in ODIs against England. There is a huge difference in Johnson now and one year back. He is more consistent and more pacy. If he use to bowl 145 1 year back, now he bowls 155 and with more accuracy.

[Vilander]

lol @ people bigging up Johnson' date='he is a bum who can bowl fast.the aussies will regret playing him in the ashes.[/quote'] He will rip the poms apart this time, only one who can handle him would be KP because he is a leftie. Mitch is bowling the most accurate spells he has ever bowled, and is swinging it at 150 +, thats steynesque.

[express bowling]

Pace doesnt matter! It's all about how effective you can be with the pace you are bowling. Johnson can bowl effectively with a pace of 140-145kph+ Bhuveneswar Kumar can bowl as effective as Johnson with pace of 125-130kph+ Both of these players can destroy the top-order

In test matches, bowling effectively at 125 to 130 k, is a very rare happening. BK, has a wonderful economy of 4.3 in ODIs, and decent overall record, with 27 wickets from 22 matches, average of 29 .... in tests has 6 wickets from 4 tests ; average 39.8, strike rate of 64. While stats over such a short period can easily be improved, his actual success has been economical bowling in ODIs. Among pacers with average of less than 26 in tests, with over 200 career wickets, there are most probably no 125 to 130 k pacers. Even in ODIs, 80% of pacers with averages less than 26 or even less than 28, with more than 150 career wickets, have been either fast or fast-medium. Very few 125 to 130 k pacers. Something to think about.

[express bowling]

^ 1) A BAD pacer, whether he has pace or not, will never succeed. 2) A good pacer without much pace, has a very slim chance of succeeding in tests, about 20 to 30% chance of ODI success and can easily succeed in t20s. 3) A good pacer with pace has high probability of success in all 3 formats.